TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TMI 95 - SUPREME COURT] has clearly highlighted that the assessee in order to seek release of the goods must invoke the provisions of the GST Act to seek release of the goods. Insofar as the judgment delivered in the case of BEST CROP SCIENCE PVT. LTD. VERSUS SUPERINTENDENT, CGST, DELHI WEST AND ORS. [ 2023 (9) TMI 996 - DELHI HIGH COURT] , it is found that the Hon ble Delhi High Court taking note of the provisions of Section 67(7) of the GST Act has observed that the prohibitory order cannot be permitted to continue indefinitely. In this case it may be relevant to consider that the assessee has not approached the respondents under Section 67(6) of the GST Act and as such, there is no reason for this Court to interfere at this stage save a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. 4. In response to such application, the office of the respondent no. 1 by an e-mail communication dated 25th January, 2024 without appropriately replying to the petitioners communication had only informed that a show-cause notice under Section 122 of the GST Act has already been issued. 5. Mr. Kanodia, learned advocate representing the petitioners, by drawing attention of this Court to Section 67(2) of the said Act submits that power has been vested on the proper officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner, either pursuant to an inspection carried out under sub-section (1) or otherwise, has reasons to believe that any goods liable to confiscation or any documents or book or things which in his opinion shall be useful for or relevant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in (2020) 5 SCC 811, and the judgment delivered by the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. v. Superintendent of Central Goods and Services Tax Delhi West, reported in (2023) 10 Centax 295 (Del.). 10. Per contra, Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate representing the respondents has taken me through the provisions of Section 67(7) of the GST Act. According to Mr. Chakraborty, the said section comes into play when no notice of the seizure is issued within a period of six months. Mr. Chakraborty further by referring to the provisions of Section 67(6) of the said Act submits that an assessee has a right to get such goods released on provisional basis even upon execution of a bond and furnishing a security in s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nner and of such quantum (even up to the total value of goods involved), respectively, as may be prescribed or on payment of applicable taxes, interest and penalty payable, as the case may be, as predicated in Section 67(6) of the Act. In the interim orders [ Kay Pan Fragrance (P) Ltd. v. State of U.P., 2019 SCC OnLine All 6201] , [Mahaveer Trading Company v. State of U.P., 2019 SCC OnLine All 6203] passed by the High Court which are subject-matter of assail before this Court, the High Court has erroneously extricated the assessees concerned from paying the applicable tax amount in cash, which is contrary to the said provision. 12. Insofar as the judgment delivered in the case of Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. (supra), I find that the Hon ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
